Re: surprising scoring when using multi_match's cross_field

Hi Stephane, yes I did try it but the results did not change. However, I reduced the number of shards from 5 to 1 and now the queryNorm is the same for every document. I learned that every shard is an independent lucene index and therefore different weights are likely to occur. However, the fi

Re: surprising scoring when using multi_match's cross_field

Christoph, I'm wondering if the problem comes from the 'query type' parameter? http://www.elasticsearch.org/blog/understanding-query-then-fetch-vs-dfs-query-then-fetch/ Have you tried dfs_query_then_fetch? Does it make any difference? All the best, Stéphane -- You received this message because

Re: surprising scoring when using multi_match's cross_field

hm, after some investigations it turns out that queryNorm is related to the shard. I observed that only one of the five shard has a different query norm, all the others have equal ones. I will retry with only one shard to see if things are getting better. -- You received this message because y

Re: surprising scoring when using multi_match's cross_field

Another effect I do not understand ist the queryNorm which differs between documents, reading the documents I assumed them to be constant. >From the lucene documentation : > queryNorm(q) is a normalizing facto

surprising scoring when using multi_match's cross_field

Hello! I am using the multi_match's cross_field query. It works very well and is exactly what I need. However, in some rare circumstances the order of the results doesn't